Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

Project page Talk
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about deletion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!


XFD backlog
V Jun Jul Aug Sep Total
CfD 0 0 0 5 5
TfD 0 0 0 0 0
MfD 0 0 0 0 0
FfD 0 0 0 0 0
RfD 0 0 2 18 20
AfD 0 0 0 0 0
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed. To propose the renaming of a template or templates, use Wikipedia:Requested moves.

How to use this pageEdit

What not to propose for discussion hereEdit

Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
Template redirects
List at Redirects for discussion.

Reasons to delete a templateEdit

Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a templateEdit

Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, follow this three-step process. The use of Twinkle (explained below) is strongly recommended, as it automates and simplifies these steps. Note that the "Template:" prefix should not be included anywhere when carrying out these steps (unless otherwise specified).

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If the template nominated is inline, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators or Template editors.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).

Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacing template name with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}} instead.)

TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en-wiki.kfd.me/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022_September_24#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Follow this link to edit today's TfD log.

Add this text to the top of the list:

  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without brackets|result of previous TfD}} directly after the Tfd2/Catfd2 template.

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ), plus one more in |with=. |with= does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code after the Tfd2 template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts.

Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editorsEdit

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD (see above), nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

Notifying related WikiProjectsEdit

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{Tfdnotice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the templateEdit

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" may not be you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

TwinkleEdit

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

DiscussionEdit

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussionEdit

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussionsEdit

September 24Edit

Template:GeelvincktreeEdit

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:IP V4 summaryEdit

100 transclusions versus 77,000 transclusions for {{IP summary}}. Redundant; never caught on as a valid alternative. Replace all transclusions with {{IP summary}} and then delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:24, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Access to public information in EuropeEdit

Replace with {{Europe topic|Access to public information in}} to link to main article automatically, ensure that all countries are included, and encourage creation of red-linked articles. See Access to public information in Serbia for example. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Cite Brenkwitz Advisory OpinionEdit

Not an actual template. Should be fixed at Foreign Agents Registration Act and then deleted. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 05:26, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

September 23Edit

Template:Campaignbox 2019–2021 Persian Gulf crisisEdit

Template related to now-deleted article 2019–2021 Persian Gulf crisis - see AfD. Consensus there that the topic is WP:OR. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:MML colorEdit

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Manchester Metrolink Frietjes (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:AM5 chipsetsEdit

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. Appears to be article content, but it is not used in any articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense DR, it will be added to articles once final specifications are out in 1-2 weeks, will be similar to use of the previous template --Denniss (talk) 18:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Denniss is right, it is not like everything gets perfect in the first revision. Erkin Alp Güney 11:15, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Hence my opinion is, oppose. Erkin Alp Güney 21:02, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 09:43, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Philippine topics sidebarEdit

No transclusions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 02:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

September 22Edit

Template:Ağın DistrictEdit

All its articles are redirects. No need for its existence. Semsûrî (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Villages in Çelikhan DistrictEdit

All its entries have been redirected so this template is of no use Semsûrî (talk) 19:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Stock Car Brasil seasonsEdit

This is a bit of a mess. {{Stock Car Brasil}} has existed since 2009. In 2018, someone made a copy of it at {{Stock Car Brasil seasons}}. Now there are multiple articles that contain both navboxes. They are identical.

Ultimately, this duplicate template should be deleted. First, all affected articles should be changed to contain only the original template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:28, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:ScanEdit

No transclusions, categories, or incoming links from discussions. Created a little over a year ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:TexasHistoricalCommissionNoteEdit

Unnecessary note used in a dozen or so citations. It is always true that downloading of a PDF may be slow. Browsers show download status, and readers can decide whether to wait or cancel the download. Delete without substitution. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:08, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Keep. No, these are different. I started using some NRHP documents which were available from the Texas Historical Commission to write or improve some NRHP articles, which I rather expect few others, or no one, has been doing, because they are so unreasonably inaccessible. This after finding that the National Park Service does not provide their version of same NRHP document for a given place, which would download quickly. And also finding that NARA does not have the given document, in their system (which also can be slow for some documents, but which I believe would prove faster if compared for cases where a given document is available both at THC and at NARA). I am a very experienced editor in this area. I have worked with these types of documents since about 2008, have surely downloaded more than 10,000 of them, and have seen state systems with varying performance come and go, and have national systems rise and decline, too. I literally wrote the book, or most of it, on how to find and use these documents, meaning the documentation for NRHP editors available at wp:NRHPHELP. The reason there are only a dozen or so usages of this template is that I personally happened to move on from working on Texas NRHPs after I had just learned to try and use TRC when other options wouldn't work. No one else stepped in to create and improve Texas NRHP articles systematically the way I had started. I have more recently been working on places in Kentucky and Colorado and scattered other places. When I come back to working on Texas places, or any other editor seriously takes on a campaign to expand our Texas NRHP coverage (properly, including the NRHP document no matter how hard it is to find and use), there will be more usages.
Please know: I have never felt a need to provide a note like this, besides for some THC files and some NARA files, where it seems truly unreasonable, and in these cases I feel it is appropriate to give some indication to the reader. And note that the warning is given only on certain files; there are many short files which do not require warning. And, sure, the wording could be different, but it is hard/impossible to provide time estimates about how long a reader's wait will be, so I have left it as it currently stands: "Downloading may be slow". Yes, that may come across as vacuous, but it's there for a reason which the reader will come to appreciate. Note also that the use of the template to provide some warning is brilliant, because it allows for the possibility that the THC server will be upgraded or something else to happen which speeds up their service, in which case the warning can be cancelled or modified for all of the difficult articles. The alternative is to make a hard-coded warning in each of these articles, and build a list of the articles where the warning has been placed, and periodically review them. That's unreasonable; this is a brilliant use of a template.
For one example, i picked the Montana Avenue Historic District document out of the references that link to this template, and it just took 14 minutes to download, with me on a fast wifi on a fast internet and a decent laptop, from 1:16 to 1:30 pm in my time zone, with the laptop running no other activity to give it the best chance. Others could have much worse experiences. That one is a 72 page PDF, and I imagine it took that long to download because it is likely scanned badly and also because the THC server is slow. I have recently had other another document which took more than an hour to download (from NARA not from THC), and it turned out to have about 500 pages, which I also imagine was scanned badly. Most persons nowadays would not believe that the document would ever show up, and would give up and close the window.
The template serves the good purpose of giving the reader a clue, that if they'd like to see this document they probably can, if they are patient enough. And that there is not some other mistake like the link going to something other than the document. Many readers in this topic area will have had experience of downloading similar documents in reasonable time, and they will tend to think there is some error when they encounter one of these difficult cases. I do agree with User:Jonesey95 think it is incredibly unusual nowadays on Wikipedia (or on the internet in general) for there to be a warning about how slow a download might be; so I believe this brief warning does stand out and accomplish the task of giving the would-be reader a clue, in these unusual cases.
sincerely, --Doncram (talk) 20:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:To2Edit

No transclusions, categories, or incoming links. Created in 2014. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Victorian Legislative Assembly Pendulum (2018-2022)Edit

No transclusions, documentation, or categories. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:İzdeniz colorEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:31, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/İzdeniz Frietjes (talk) 15:15, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:IETT colorEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:31, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/İETT Frietjes (talk) 14:55, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:S-line/IRI Railway left/Tehran - Hashtgerd - QazvinEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Tehran Commuter Railways Frietjes (talk) 14:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:S-line/IRI Railway left/Tabriz - JolfaEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Azerbaijan Commuter Railways Frietjes (talk) 14:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:IRI Railway colorEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:19, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/IRI Railways Frietjes (talk) 14:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Presidents of FijiEdit

Propose merging Template:Presidents of Fiji with Template:Heads of state of Fiji.
Template:Heads of state of Fiji should be merged to Template:Presidents of Fiji, and the latter template should be moved to the former one for the title to be appropriate. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 14:02, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:4TeamBracket-2LegNoSeedsEdit

Redundant to {{4TeamBracket}}. – Pbrks (t • c) 03:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:48, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

He or HerEdit

Propose merging Template:His/her with Template:Their.

Propose merging Template:Him/her with Template:Them.

Propose merging Template:He/she with Template:They.

Propose merging Template:His or hers with Template:Theirs.

Propose merging Template:His or her with Template:Their.

Propose merging Template:Him or her with Template:Them.

Propose merging Template:He or she with Template:They.
While there are still a number of people who reject the notion of the singular they, it has become an increasingly common an accepted part of vernacular. Personally, as a wikipedian who uses such as their pronouns and does not want to be referred to by the reductive he/she, I just seem no reason for said templates to exist. It is intended (and realistically can only be used) with regard to other users. While some wikipedians have not set their gender and will have {{them}} render "them" versus {{he or she}} rendering "he or she", I can't foresee this causing any form of issues in communication. In the absence of wikipedia's ability to let users set a gender-neutral pronoun explicitly, it seems both inline with the increasingly common singular they and being inclusive to migrate from "he or she" to they. TartarTorte 00:48, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Merge all as proposed. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is a repost of a proposal that previously failed at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 29#Template:He or she. Nothing meaningful has changed in the last year, and I continue to believe that [i]t is not the duty of TfD to try to force users to use singular they if they do not want to. To be clear, I'm not opposing the use of singular they (I think it's perfectly fine English), merely opposing the attempt to systematically replace "he or she" with "they" (or any other form) in the countless places these templates are used including archived discussions, which I view as a form of righting great wrongs. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    You are correct, nothing has changed. WP:NPA is still policy. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    Do you seriously believe that "he or she" is a personal attack? How? ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 02:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    Do you seriously believe that "he or she" is a personal attack? Yes. How? If someone says their pronouns are they/them and you explicitly use "he or she" you are basically being disrespectful to those editors. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    Even if it is disrespectful, that's still a very long way from being a personal attack. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    Misgendering is absolutely a personal attack when done with intent, although I doubt most editors using these templates are doing so. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 15:42, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Snow keep as it has already been thoroughly discussed before and nothing has changed. In my opinion if you want to change how people talk to one another that should be through a behavioural guideline, not through merging some templates. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 02:06, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    Or you can just remove the template enabling personal attacks and enforce WP:NPA. And "snow" !votes should really be for situations where the prior discussion is recent, not nearly a year and a half ago. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Snow keep, opposed in the strongest possible terms. It is to be applauded that non-binary people increasingly have recognition of their pronouns, I rejoice in that (check my pronouns). But I don't know any non-binary people that would insist that all of their cis acquaintances and friends be uniformly labeled with "singular they" regardless of their own preference for 'he' or 'she'. That turns personal freedom and preference on its head, makes a mockery of personal preference, and turns it into the dictatorship of the minority. Kill this truly awful proposal with fire. Btw, Locke Cole: it appears that you have replied to every !vote recorded so far; kindly read WP:BLUDGEON. Mathglot (talk) 03:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    @Mathglot: Perhaps you should strike your !vote until you understand what these templates do. 🤦‍♂️ I'm aware of WP:BLUDGEON. I don't care about essays, I care about policy. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:56, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep all per recent discussion. Nothing technical has changed, and consensus has not shifted regarding these templates. TFD is not the right venue for discussing if and how these templates can be changed to be more inclusive. If one or more of them can be modified to always output the right preferred pronoun, then there will be more persuasive grounds for a merge or redirect. Do the technical work before restarting this discussion, please. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Merge all as proposed, I think an avoidance of accidental misgendering is always good. It doesn't seem like all the oppose voters understand what these templates do - They don't force a gender-neutral option on editors, they read a users preference and select the option that's applicable. It could only render a user's pronouns as they/them if that user has already explicitly indicated in their settings that they want to be referred to with gender-neutral terms when possible (e.g. "their contributions", "that editor"). That said, the bludgeoning isn't helping the merger's case. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 05:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    I understand perfectly what these templates do, and maintain my opposition. And, given that preference you quoted is the default for users who have never set preferences, your last sentence isn't even true. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    I was really only responding to the idea that this somehow turns personal freedom and preference on its head, makes a mockery of personal preference, and turns it into the dictatorship of the minority, which is the most ridiculous overreaction to a proposal I think I've ever seen on this site. It makes complete sense to use gender neutral pronouns as a default setting in pretty much any context, so it's still unclear to me where the actual problem with this arises - Does the Wikimedia Foundation force users to use singular they in a way that warrants correction as well? ThadeusOfNazereth(he/they)Talk to Me! 15:40, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose merge, though I wouldn't oppose some form of deprecation (e.g. removing them from Template:Pronoun templates). And if they are to be merged, subst the existing transclusions per WP:TPNO so that the record accurately shows what was originally said. Nardog (talk) 08:59, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep - I don't like retroactively changing the words that someone used. I think that the Mediawiki software SHOULD be modified to allow someone to identify as "non-binary", rather than making "non-binary" merely "unspecified". That would settle these discussions. People who have a binary gender, but have not shared what it is can be referred to as the grammatically correct "his or her" and people who WANT to be called "they" can be called "they". --B (talk) 11:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Retroactively changing how something is rendered is uncool. NE Ent 20:42, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
    If these templates were to be merged, they can be substed as User:Nardog proposed, which means that what was originally said is maintained. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 07:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

September 21Edit

Template:Villages in Sincik DistrictEdit

All the articles are redirected now so this template is of no use Semsûrî (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:BMT4Edit

Unused, replaced by Template:Station link. Cards84664 12:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:FCC LMS letterEdit

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:14, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether to replace {{FCC letter}} with this or convert uses of that to {{cite web}}. I made this in preparation for a likely switch of documents at the Federal Communications Commission.
The FCC letter template supports short citations to URLs like http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/getimportletter_exh.cgi?import_letter_id=69738. These are documents uploaded into an FCC system called CDBS and have a five- or six-digit numeric identifier.
This summer, the FCC has been quietly porting these over to their current system, known as LMS. (If you see an [LMS] link in an infobox like at KUGS, it will show links to these documents.) The same document is available in LMS from https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/fc783d60-ec01-35bd-4c8c-fcd5ec5a9c4d. FCC LMS letter is designed to take that long hex string as a short entry.
The FCC has been progressively deprecating or shutting off functions of CDBS such that all new applications in broadcasting go through the LMS system. There are 1,033 transclusions of FCC letter, many in citations (and a significant portion added by me). The end goal would be to see as many of these ported to LMS letter when the FCC decides to take CDBS out of service.
I've also been musing about having many of the citations changed to {{Cite web}} instead, which would permit things like IABot to interact with them and richer metadata (right now, FCC letter does not support anything more than a title or a pre-populated title for the "history cards" that are one of the document sets accessed through it). Pinging Jonesey95 for your feedback. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:21, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
It seems like you could update the nicely documented {{FCC letter}} to take a new |lms= parameter, or something similar, rather than creating a new template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:31, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:01, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:10TeamBracket-2ElimBEdit

Redundant to {{10TeamBracket-2Elim}}. – Pbrks (t • c) 04:51, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:47, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

September 20Edit

Template:Cercanías Valencia colorEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:25, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

replaced by Module:adjacent stations/Cercanías Valencia Frietjes (talk) 15:44, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:6TeamBracket-2Elim-BEdit

Redundant to {{6TeamBracket-2Elim}}. – Pbrks (t • c) 15:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:01, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Iba, ZambalesEdit

A bunch of unnecessarily long navboxes that serve little to no purpose at all. Seems like they were only made just for the sake of having navboxes dedicated to them. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 07:55, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Keep pending editing to remove irrelevant links. I see at least six links in {{Iba, Zambales}} that appear relevant; I have not looked at the other two templates. TFD is not cleanup. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Keep Id say reorganize to keep the relevant articles as Jonesey has mentioned above and see if there are five minimum links for the navboxes so they don't get renominated for deletion. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
  • I withdraw my nomination. I'll try to fix them instead. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 03:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Uw-copying-nosourceEdit

Propose merging Template:Uw-copying-nosource with Template:Uw-copying, or converting them to multi-level.
This concerns the following two templates :

  1. {{Uw-copying}}: created 2009-09-20
  2. {{Uw-copying-nosource}}: created 2015-04-24 as an offshoot of #1 (2015 diff)

Both of these templates advise users about requirements to provide copy attribution with similar language. Other than some discretionary rewording, the major difference is that #2 mentions "risk being blocked" while #1 does not (see diff) .

It seems to me the two templates could easily be merged, with perhaps the addition of a param |gentle=yes (or its inverse: |riskblock=yes) to exclude or include mention of a block.

Alternatively, we could just convert this into a multi-level template, which, in a way, the two already kind of are—only that instead of having suffix digits, they have different names. Perhaps #1 should simply be moved to {{Uw-copying1}} and {{Uw-copying-nosource}} should be {{Uw-copying2}}. Template doc advice could recommend starting with #1 for newbs, and #2 for other users, and a #3 and 4 could be added, if needed. My preference: convert to multi-level. Mathglot (talk) 01:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, merge. I created the nosource template because the standard one used to read "The attribution has been provided for this situation", and of course you couldn't provide attribution if no source was identifiable. That was rephrased by Lord Belbury with this edit in 2020 (thank you!), so there's now no reason for mine to be kept. Making the block warning optional is a good idea, thanks, Mathglot. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

September 19Edit

Template:Media Distancia colorEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:24, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Renfe Frietjes (talk) 23:30, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:6TeamBracket-1Round-infoEdit

No transclusions. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. – Pbrks (t • c) 01:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Laura GibsonEdit

Two directly-related articles to the topic, and all 3 already all link to and from one another. The song link is a cover and B-side to a non-notable single. This template doesn't provide additional aid to navigation. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:50, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:USFedCircuitCompositionEdit

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:2022 Japan Rugby League One – Division 1 resultsEdit

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:12TeamBracket-NCAAEdit

No transclusions. Redundant to {{12TeamBracket-LateBye}} –Aidan721 (talk) 18:23, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. – Pbrks (t • c) 01:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:12TeamBracket-NCAA7Edit

No transclusions. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. – Pbrks (t • c) 01:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Elite 9 Hockey LeagueEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was speedy delete as a request by the template author to do so was carried out, and thus this listing is moot. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:52, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

A navbox that links to only two other articles, and the other redlinks aren't likely to be filled in given the article about the league itself is trending to soft-delete on AfD. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:05, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Listed for CSD by author (me). –Aidan721 (talk) 17:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

September 18Edit

Template:Mosques in VietnamEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Two links. Fails NENAN. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:06, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:British courtesy viscountsEdit

Redundant to Category:British courtesy viscounts, per WP:TMPG. Pilaz (talk) 18:22, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete The current nomination statement is incorrect; as per WP:CLT; navboxes cannot be redundant to categories. However, this is not a useful navbox as too many of the entries are redlinks and redirects, and the ones that do have articles are too loosely affiliated. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:48, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:32TeamBracket-2legs-except finalEdit

No transclusions; redundant to {{32TeamBracket}}. – Pbrks (t • c) 14:56, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:Wrestling at the 2021 Islamic Solidarity GamesEdit

As a result of this merge, we don't need this template anymore as all results are now in a single page. Simeon (talk) 12:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Template:4TeamBracket-2ElimEdit

Redundant to {{4TeamBracket-2Elim-B}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 23:28, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. – Pbrks (t • c) 15:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep, the {{4TeamBracket-2Elim}} is more compact, or replace with {{3RoundBracket|byes=1|RD1-group1=Winner's bracket|RD1-group2=Loser's bracket}}. Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

September 17Edit

Template:TMDB nameEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:29, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

This recently created template generates broken links to The Movie Database - it uses the .com domain and not the correct .org. But it can't (and shouldn't) be fixed anyway because this website is on the spam blacklist. Please delete. MrOllie (talk) 22:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete Article for this website was deleted; both the article and template were created by a novice user with a history of problematic articles or templates that have been deleted. I have advised the template creator to learn more about template creation before making more. I think it will save everyone a lot of time, especially this template's creator. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 03:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Unidentified decedentEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I've thought about this for a long time, and I've concluded, in the many months that I've been aware of this template, that it is a textbook case of WP:NENAN. There is no clear and obvious roadmap to follow through this topic area that justifies this navbox's existence. It is also suffering from serious bloat, especially as more victims become identified, effectively nullifying the point to this navbox's own existence (see also this discussion that saw a category for homicide victims who were not immediately identified get deleted). There may be plenty of notability in this topic area, but we already have several list pages that handle this better (they're even linked to from this very template). Pinging major contributors @TheEditor7499, @Haunted Spy, @Killuminator, @Sammylovesyouxx, @Ryguy611, and @Doggybag2355 (template creator notified). Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 16:07, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

@Zeke, the Mad Horrorist: I was wondering if there eventually was going to be something akin to a cap on how many cases should be added to the infobox, but after giving it some thought, I'd understand if it needs deleting. I have no objections if that ends up being the case. Haunted Spy (talk) 16:28, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --Izno (talk) 03:56, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:UsercatUSEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:26, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

No transclusions. It appears that this user-page template has fallen out of fashion in favor of {{User in Massachusetts}} and similar userboxen. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:4TeamBracket-Compact-Tennis3-with 3rdEdit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

No transclusions. – Pbrks (t • c) 02:45, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Old discussionsEdit

Completed discussionsEdit

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.kfd.me/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1100042114"